Matt Artz

Post navigation

0 Comments

I thought Morrison and Bacon would have had more of a positive impact. But, as this year’s trend with all elections, if Marty voted for you, you weren’t elected.

There were some bright spots.

Propositions that people did not understand were mostly rejected, as they should have been.

Sierra Clubber Norman La Force lost his bid at EBRPD’s Ward 1 seat. The more pragmatic Whitney Dotson seems far less rigid and will hopefully work to expand park access. There was a similar result on the peninsula.

WW passed ensuring that we will have more uninspiring ranch lands with bulldozed fire roads to enjoy.

Vinnie ran against the machine, beating Trisha– a machine candidate. Suzanne Chan also did well. Vinnie’s had a well-organized one man campaign. He started early, learned from the prior election, and cobbled together a good base of supporters (who posted signs for him and rallied on the street corner) that if he’s smart, he’ll keep together. I noticed these supporters were the local peace adn justice group, so he tapped into an existing network which is good. This network has long been supporters of Morrison, so it’s not surprising that Morrison supporters also voted for Bacon. The vitality of this network was shown in their donations to the Morrison campaign. Still very much to be reckoned with?

I unfortunately don’t know much about Suzanne Chan’s campaign. However, she’ll continue a moderately fiscally conservative presence on the council, left behind by Steve Cho. If ethnic blocs in Fremont exist, I wold guess by nature they are nonpartisan and somewhat conservative. ?

Agreeing w/ Marty. WW passed and they haven’t even finished spending the last bond money they received. Yes, we’ll have more uninspired ranch land park with poor access. The Vargas plateau is an example of lousy park management.

I also don’t understand how people can vote to put CA deeper in debt when our debt rating in already in jeopardy and we are in debt due to our extremely progressive tax structure. When Google has a bad year, CA goes into debt.

The voters of Fremont have spoken. They have elected by a overwhelming majority of
27.8%, for Wiekowski, 20.9% for Chan.
With that overwhelming majority they will lead us into the future, decide our fate on many issues.

Funny you should say uninspired. I can’t think of anything more inspiring than an open pasture hillside, brimming with mustard in the sun. The best part of Fremont is the tiny area of precious open space we have left. The Vargas plateau is an example of inspiring, aesthetic open space.

Since people get to vote for two candidates, the percentage of the vote council candidates got should actually be doubled. Instead of 27.8% for Wieckowski, 55.8% of the voters voted for him. By the same rule, Chan got 41.8%.

Actually, I don’t think that’s mathematically correct. Each person gets 2 votes. You add all of the votes per candidate and divide by the total number of votes. It’s the same percentage. If we follow your logic, all of the totals would add up to 200%. Look at your math: Bob + Sue = 97.6% of the vote? I don’t think so.

Suppose 100 people vote between 3 candidates: A, B, and C. Of those 100:

Maybe I’m not explaining it right. As of today, 47,800 people voted for mayor. Wieckowski has about 22,000, just less than 50% of the total voting for mayor.

Historically, 100% of the voters vote for president, but only 90% vote in the mayor’s election and only 75% vote for council. So, of the total vote cast for council, about 39,000 +/-, Wieckowski was voted for on more than half the ballots cast in the council election.